DON’T GET HOSED AND TASED BY THOSE BEHIND THE TAX…VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z

Let’s all remember that the City is out of money, or they want us to believe they are out of money, right! Well here we go again, the City of Riverside sent out this mailer to all of its residents, which would be well over 100,000 households. How much do you think you the taxpayer paid for this? I’m sure most of us just threw it in the trash. If the City can afford to send each household this information, then you would think that the City is doing okay. We saw this exact same thing with Measure-A pamphlets back in 2013, the City uses taxpayer monies to send these “informational pamphlets,” but in essence, are psychologically designed for a vote in their favor. Don’t be fooled, as you were last time, these informational pamphlet were structured, written and fashioned to have you vote Yes on Measure-Z.

Why are we receiving this informational pamphlet? THE CITY NEEDS TO ASK US FOR MORE MONEY BECAUSE THEY SCREWED UP!

Unbeknownst to the taxpayer is the claim that if you Vote No on Measure-Z, you will lose important City services. Let me make this perfectly clear, we lost City services a long time ago, and we will NEVER get them back. The City chose to invest and squander our money on such things as “Government Entertainment,” as in the Fox Theater, instead of taking care of basic services for its citizens.

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

This “informational pamphlet” strategically shows a playground full of kids (because its all about the kids, isn’t it?), along with Public Works Employees, a Police Officer and a Fire Fighter. The title is “Measure-Z, What’s It’s All About.” Again, the City is going to tell the taxpayer how to vote, as they did with the water measure in 2013 known as Measure-A. When you foolishly passed this measure in 2013, you voted to tax yourself 11.5%! What the City promised us then never materialized, and what they promise us now will never happen. What is really egregious, is that the City and their cohorts really do believe you will fall for this and vote YES on Measure-Z. They are going to trick the unsuspecting taxpayer into showering them with billions of dollars.

Instead of holding staff and leadership accountable, our Council decided to concoct a “Spending Pledge” a few weeks ago. REALLY? How stupid and foolish this makes the Council looks. So rather then taking responsibility and accountability they’ve resorted to “pinky promises” in order to sway public opinion. Five of the eight electeds’ on the Council Chamber have held there positions for 7 years or longer. They own this fiscal mess. Measure-Z (Sales Tax Increase) is their attempt to remove accountability for running this ship aground….sort of a “You can trust us this time, we even placed our names on it!” These men are spending addicts. So what do they really need this money for? More Government Entertainment, Pensions and Raises.

You have to be a fool to give spending addicts more money! Vote “No on Measure-Z!”

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

The above pamphlet tells you, the taxpayer, why the City needs the additional money. For years the City leadership Has been boasting about our City being financially sound, you can all remember them saying “We have 40 million in reserves” they are now telling us that the City never fully recovered from the economic recession that started in 2008. Even Police Chief Sergio came out in the Summer of 2015 to tell City Council the Police Budget was sound. The City is lying. The City will never recover because they have misspent, over spent, passed special interest projects and new employee contracts without any funding sources. They were irresponsible with taxpayer monies and NOW THEY WANT MORE!

This November 2016, you will also be voting on another tax, Measure-O (Riverside Unified School Bond). If it passes, this will increase your property taxes $100.00 per every $100,000.00 your house is worth. So if you have a $400,000.00 home, your new additional property tax will be $400.00, and then add your new sales tax (Measure Z), which can be an additional $100.00 or more per year. You now have a total approximation of $500.00 per year additional tax. Then I’m sure all of you do remember there will be a sewer increase this year, and don’t forget Public Utilities will also have their hand out soon. You will also need to look at the State and the Federal Government, they may need more money as well.

How much more can you afford ? And who will be most impacted by this? The Most obvious is the poor, disabled, seniors and the retiree. TMC predicts this will also have a HUGE impact on Churches, a 10% tithe at the very minimum will be difficult if we have an additional 5 to 10% tax each year. Taking $40 to $400.00 out of your packer each month for additional taxes will be devastating for many.

CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE

This pamphlet was done by design to touch emotional center, voting with your heart, as opposed to voting with your head. Did the City purposely use two black police officer to show how diverse they are? With a small child to show they are connected to the community? This informational Pamphlet is simply just a bunch of BS and about the financial mess the city is in. They will not cut anything they will make the taxpayer go without the basics. Some say this is all about the increases to Police and Fire and Some state that Police and Fire make less than Teachers, I personally find that an insult to Teachers, but Transparent California tells a different picture on Fire and Police. It seems that they are making more than Corporate Execs and Doctors! The Riverside Police Department have incredible amounts of OT (Remember that’s how they pad their pensions), Other Pay and Benefits before finally tallying up the final total. If you come from the Corporate Private Sector as I do, OT as this is never seen. Overtime as this would lead a corporation to Bankruptcy, and that may be where the City is going.

Back in 2013, the City sent out at taxpayers expense, and informational flyer, known as the Water Measure, or Measure-A. In this taxpayer paid pamphlet, the City of Riverside threatened the taxpayer, that if this Measure-A didn’t pass the following would occur: the City would be forced to cut $6.7 million in local services, there may actually as residents faced with more gangs, graffiti and rundown streets. They actually stated that 79 City positions would be eliminated which included Police Officers, Firefighters, School Crossing Guards (we know what happened there), youth recreation programs (we know what happened there), senior services (they actually threatened the Goeske Center Seniors they needed to vote for this or we won’t fund you).

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

In the above 2013 Measure-A informational pamphlet, the first page also shows children, police officers with a child and public work employees. Quite the same formula as the current. In 2013 Mayor Rusty Bailey lied about Measure A, he has lied again today about Measure-Z. What else has Bailey Lied about? TMC HAS THE STORY! COMING SOON..

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

CONTRIBUTIONS SUPPORTING YES ON MEASURE-Z HAVE BEEN POURING IN, you may ask “Who are they?” All the elitist bastards that will benefit handsomely, one in particular, Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey. But also the usual suspects such as the so called Non-Profits and Unions.

Bottom line folks, the City of Riverside never had a revenue problem, they have a spending problem, and spent they did. As with the Renaissance Project, with then City Manager Brad Hudson, who spent, over spent and misspent your monies like a drunken sailor. TMC wrote about this in detail. Most importantly we told council about that as well, and we predicted the City would be out of money and in trouble in 2015. WE WERE RIGHT. Now current leadership City Manager John Russo continues to lie and spin the truth on how all this happened. He now wants to continue the reckless spending practices. They just can’t help themselves.

Councilman Paul Davis, Andy Melendrez, Rusty Bailey, Mike Gardner and Chris McArthur were the responsible parties for getting us in this mess, This is how it works: Police and Fire Unions work to benefit themselves by laundering member dues, paid for by taxpayers, to return in campaign funds for the benefit and control of elected official. You may ask why Tim Strack, from the Fire Union, is giving over a $100,000.00 to the Yes on Measure-Z campaign. Why? Because its all about money and their own personal gain, its never been about you and the basic services of the city. Public Safety has found a way to hose and tase the taxpayer into submission, and this is wrong! Ultimately, sounds like strong arm tactics, when referencing the importance of their jobs to the community. This is a no, no, and could also be inferred as ‘coercion.’ But when you have no leadership to effectively protect the taxpayer, you have nothing.

REMEMBER FOLKS DON’T BELIEVE FOR A MINUTE THAT THESE PARASITES ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE TAXPAYER! THE MONIES ALLOCATED TO PASS MEASURE-Z ARE HUGE! THESE PEOPLE ARE IN IT FOR PERSONAL GAIN, OUR LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY SPECIAL INTEREST. VOTE NO ON MEASURE Z

REMEMBER MY FELLOW TAXPAYERS DON’T GET HOSED!

VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z

THIS TAX ONLY SERVES, AND CONTINUES TO SERVE THE PUBLIC SERVANT ELITES AND ESTABLISHMENT ELITES OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.

DONATE: Come On Folks, Help and Support No On Measure-Z by donating to the following links:

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

I took an in depth look at the editorial opinions that the P.E. has written over the past few years, and here are some of the headlines:

Beaumont Betrayed by its leaders

Ambulance Monopoly Disputes.

Over whelming Pension Costs

Beaumont Ignoring Taxpayers

Riverside Fiscal outlook

Riverside has a spending problem

Budget goes into overtime.

Riverside Removes Rose Tinted Glasses

Keep Government Honest

In one of your editorials, there is even a discussion about inefficient government. I included the Beaumont headlines because I believe the City of Riverside is very similar to Beaumont and or San Bernardino, for that matter. That is because management and leadership for this entire region is governed the same way.

These headlines do not reflect the so called “successful direction that the leadership of Rusty Bailey has taken its citizens.” These editorials reflect a message completely contrary to the P.E.’s endorsement of Rusty Bailey. The Message coming out of the Press Enterprise is: Corruption, Cut Services for the Citizens, Continue to Pay for Special Interest and Increase Public Employee Pensions. Who do you think got us here? — RUSTY BAILEY.

The Press Enterprise has had a front row seat at City Hall longer than I have, and either I am missing something, or the P.E. is continuing to protect the “status quo.” Throughout the 2016 Mayoral race, Rusty Bailey flipped on all the issues he previously supported. First, at the Chamber sponsored debate, he stated he would not use the “veto” power of the Mayor, and that he supported Measure A (City Prosecution of Misdemeanors) and his vision of the Trolley/Street Car. At the same debate, I stated I would have VETOED the Measure A vote, and that I opposed Measure A and his Trolley/Street Car — because we can’t afford it!! Interestingly, at the very last debate, Rusty Bailey stated that he NOW believes that he should have vetoed the Measure A vote, is against Measure A and no longer supports his Trolley/Streetcar vision because we can’t afford it. Hmmmm? Sounds familiar. Rusty completely collapsed and is NOW singing my song. I became the leader, and he the follower.

The suggestion of the P.E. Board to Rusty Bailey is that “he must become a cheerleader for fiscal responsibility.” “HE MUST BECOME!” Does the Board think the citizens of Riverside are stupid? What the hell has he been doing for the last 10 years? Oh yea, he’s been riding his bike! So, basically the P.E. Board is suggesting that Mr. Bailey need to be more like Vivian Moreno. Rusty Bailey will NEVER be fiscally responsible because his “impressive list of supporters” still have their hands out to collect the municipal welfare he is ready, willing and able to give them. That’s why he has them. The P.E. Board is just too clueless in thinking we don’t get its message. We do. We get it LOUD AND CLEAR!

The only two Candidates that should have been considered for this endorsement based on the message coming out of current P.E. editorials and articles, should have been myself, Vivian Moreno, and Nancy Melendez. The P.E. Board calls me an “interesting challenger.” Really! The ONLY candidate that has taken on the issues of the citizens has been myself, you said so yourselves.. The Citizens of Riverside need to take this City Back, and the Press Enterprise is not helping that happen.

Rusty and Paul have been part of the problem that will lead to the eventual destruction of the City of Riverside. These men were afraid to fight for the rights of the citizens of Riverside. They were afraid of their own staff — that they were in charge of! The Council and the Mayor have not been doing the job the people elected them to do.

The “YES MEN” of Riverside are Rusty Bailey, Paul Davis, Mike Gardner, Chris MacArthur, Jim Perry, John Burnard, and Andy Melendrez. Make no mistake about it, these men are the ones responsible for the headlines coming out of the Press Enterprise. These men are all ready to raise taxes and at the same time willing to cut services to the citizens, but not to the special interest. Our quality of life has suffered greatly because of the waste, fraud, and abuse that these men all voted “YES” for.

In my interview with this Editorial Board, the participants were all in agreement that the issues and concerns of the very valuable citizens brought forward week after week to council meetings should have been looked into by the Council and the Mayor. They had a responsibility to do the work of the people. They did not. They will not. Nothing will change.

The shell games will continue if Rusty Bailey becomes Mayor for a 2nd term. The taxes of the citizens and the utility rate payers will continue to grow. Our quality of life and our standard of living will decline. The Lawsuits to protect our Charter/Constitution and the citizens of Riverside will continue to be filed. I will continue to research City documents and keep informing the citizens of Riverside through my blog site Thirtymilesofcorruption.com

I had a blast running for Mayor, my message was sound and informative and by the end of the debate cycle, all the candidates were singing my “veto” song. The Press Enterprise endorsement invitation was the only endorsement invitation I accepted and participated in. I only did so because I was very curious about the process and outcome. I knew that endorsement of Rusty Bailey was possible, which would in essence confirm that the P.E. is really part of the problem. However, the solution is already available to the people — Thirtymilesofcorruption.com and they have been visiting in droves.

So despite the outcome of the Mayoral race, I achieved all my personal goals:

I Tripled the readership of Thirtymiles.

The public became more aware of the reality of abuses at City Hall.

My name recognition is greater than ever before.

The Citizens are becoming more aware that the TRUE FINANCIAL PICTURE of the City of Riverside can only be found on Thirtymilesofcorruption.com

And The Citizens of Riverside Know that they can come to Thirtymilesofcorruption.com for the REAL STORY.

THIRTY MILE’s Is the Independent Voice.

Let me suggest a last headline for the P.E.: “ It’s Cheaper to Keep Her” You see P.E. Board, I may have been Mr. Baileys most interesting challenger but now I’m Yours…..

Do the Math… It’s Cheaper to Keep Her.

FULL PAGE AD PURCHASED BY RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES IN THE PRESS ENTERPRISE FOR MEMORIAL DAY! NOT ONLY A WASTE OF MONEY FOR THE RATE PAYERS, WAS THIS A GIFT BACK TO THE PRESS ENTERPRISE FOR ENDORSING RUSTY? This is the kind of thing we constantly find reprehensible, the P.E. endorses Rusty during the week, and now receives payment for an expensive full page ad, paid for by RPU. First, RPU does not need to advertise. Why? Because they are a public monopoly, meaning the rate payers own it. Secondly, who authorized this ad to be purchased, none of the chair holding rate payers were told! If RPU continues to waste rate payers monies, they should have at least given that money to real veteran needs. What did this cost P.E.? $30,000.00? We will get the invoice! The veteran below in the pic is silver star recipient Andrew Melendrez, who is actually Councilman Andy Melendrez’s dad. This is the second time RPU has run Andy’s dad picture like this. Andy evidently won’t vote against these kinds of waste. He owns it, actually they own him.

CLICK TO ENLARGE IMAGE

Don’t Forget to Vote Vivian Moreno

For Riverside Mayor this June 2016!

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

On Wednesday, May 29th, a forum on the history and health issues surrounding Riveride’s Ag Park was conducted by Penny Newman. Newman concluded that the seriousness of the violations present at the site will probably end with someone going to jail. Newman stated that developer Chuck Cox knew there were PCB’s in the liquid sludge, and that it would have to be incinerated. However, as that would’ve been expensive, he instead decided to mix the liquid PCB’s with dirt to make it bulk waste so that it could be hauled off to Kettlemen Hills Toxic Dump site.

City workers were sent in to clean up the sludge. Haz mat was never called. The question is what did Chuck Cox know and when did he know it? We believe he knew something.

CLICK TO ENLARGE

Newman also told the crowd of several dozen that the original description of the AG Park property submitted by Cox to the DTSC was that of “vacant,” never mentioning it was a former sewer plant. Therefore, DTSC (Department of Toxic Substances Control) was misinformed.

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

Bob Beers, Cox’s Engineer, told Newman that they had the proper document to show that they had the right to be on the property. This October 04, 2003, Press Enterprise article stated that there was a contract with the City of Riverside, which read that, “subject to obtaining a grading permit from the city, shall….demolish and remove from the Ag Parcel the concrete, asphalt and sewer debris currently located thereon to the reasonable satisfaction of the city.” Former Assistant City Manager Michael Beck mentions Cox, “jumped the gun.” Was Beers disingenuous with Penny Newman?

At the AG Park Forum, resident Jim Martin gives a bit a history that took place early on in 2003. We have to give the utmost respect and credit to Jim Martin, who has been an advocate for the AG Park neighborhood longer than anyone we can remember. As is usually the case in the River City, no one listened to him when the solutions were less messy.

Both Council Candidates, John Burnard and Alysia Webb for Ward 7, attended the forum. Burnard was seen taking a slew of notes during the forum, sitting next to Press Enterprise reporter Alicia Robinson. Were these to take back to developer Chuck Cox and the city of Riverside for damage control?

Residents told us that they when they asked Ward 7 Council candidate, John Burnard, if he had received any contributions from Developer Chuck Cox, he stated emphatically, “No.” So we at TMC investigated .. and what we found is that Mr. Burnard received a $100 contribution from …. (drumroll) Developer Chuck Cox, as indicated in his 460 filing.

CLICK TO ENLARGE

Who else is donating to Burnard’s campaign? Ward 1 Councilman, Mike Gardner, contributed. Of course current Ward 7 City Councilman Steve Adams was is a supporter as well. Adam’s, whose long relationship of being tied to developer Chuck Cox, would leave a bad taste of toxins in anyone’s mouth … something we know pesty Burnard is an expert in.

Burnard has the support of a slew of unions, even the SEIU, which is quite remarkable since we are told he is a registered Republican. (Burnard must have overlooked this endorsement, since he has yet to mention it publicly.) The last time a council candidate didn’t agree with the union machine, we the public coughed up $100,000 for an investigation that concluded with the Council voting “not to vote”.

Hopefully, all this should give those in Ward 7 an idea of who and who not to vote for. We endorse candidate Alyssia Webb, who has not received any union contributions, possibly because she wholeheartedly represents the concerns of the average residents of Ward 7, particularly in regards to the Ag Park issue. If elected, will we see another Councilman Mike Soubirous character assassination?

Ward 7 resident, Jim Martin exposes that while Burnard is telling everyone he was against Measure L, all his current supporters were for it. Meanwhile sources were telling TMC that Burnard was originally for Measure L, but was convinced at the last minute to place his vote against it.

Above pics show the digester, a diagram of the digester, more of the broken digester, the sludge and the city of Riverside attempting to dilute the concentration of contaminants with soil. (Click Images to Enlarge).

All City staff and Council involved in this mess should resign immediately. You know who you are. The most heartbreaking part of all of this is that people have died and there are many who are very sick. The City of Riverside would have continued to cover-up the dirty little secret in Ag Park if it weren’t for some really great citizens. It was Dvonne M. Pitruzzello, Errol Koschewitz and TMC who went door to door in the Ag Park talking to the citizens in the area for a couple of days because we were so upset at Councilmember Steve Adams and his arrogant behavior especially about this project.

From there we found Marliyn Whitney, who has become the mighty force behind the fight to uncover the real story of Ag park. Thank you, Marilyn, for your dedication and tireless effort keeping your neighborhood informed and the City aware that this is not going to go away until there is accountability for the cover-up and devastation due to the misdeeds of some of our “leaders”.

OVER COLLECTION OF FUNDS FROM RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES:

AT A WARD 1 COMMUNITY MEETING IN THE WOOD STREETS, JASON HUNTER, HOLDS COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIS PROMISE OF TAKING ITEMS OFF THE CONSENT CALENDER IF A CONSTITUENT ASKS. NOT TRUE SAYS HUNTER! WOULD THE REAL MIKE GARDNER PLEASE COME FORWARD? WHEN ASKED, GARDNER RESPONDS, “SOMETIMES I WILL, AND SOMETIMES I WON’T!”

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST, “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”. WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT… AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! WE JUST CAN’T SPELL! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT: THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

There have been two candidate forums so far we have attended. As residents of Ward 1 familiar with the issues, TMC believes challenger Tom Podgorski was the clear winner of both. Podgorski is highly qualified: he’s an economics teacher at Poly High School, a certified financial planner, and we believe he would add a level of financial intelligence to the dais that has been sorely missing for years.

Councilman Mike Gardner spent the vast majority of his professional career working for SoCal Edison. What did the citizens of Riverside and Ward 1 get with his qualifications and the 8 years he has been sitting on the Council? Higher utility rates, a total neglect of the north side neighborhood, the loss of the historic Press Bindery Building, the failure to get the Main Downtown Library redone, and tree branches falling on houses and in the street. And traffic, traffic, and more traffic.

He is supported by the unions, so you can bet the unions got and will get their way.

Mike Gardner and the unions, along with the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, want another term to fix things. Should the citizens of Ward 1 give him one more try? Thirty Miles of Corruption and Javier and Vivian Moreno say, “absolutely NO,” to more self-serving political hacks. It would be our recommendation that all our followers and friends of Ward 1 please vote for Tom Podgorski. We need a change.

We also urge my neighbors and friends to come to the final debate forum and see for yourself why Tom Podgorski is the change we need. Our arguments about the dark side of union support will become painfully obvious. Mr. Gardner has received all the union/Chamber support, and the work of the people did not get done. However, believe you me the work of the unions and the Chamber did get done. Cindy Roths’ Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce got her million plus this year in cash, subsidies, and in-kind contributions. What did you get? Higher taxes, like the water conservation charge added to your utility bill last Spring! Tom Podgorski is supported by the average person who pays the bills: let’s give him a chance. We are hopeful that Ward 1 residents see through the Gardner smokescreen, and vote for change.

The last forum of this election cycle will be hosted by The League of Women Voters, The Group, Latino Network, NAACP Riverside Branch and the Downtown Neighborhood Alliance. It will be held Wednesday May 6, from 7 pm to 9 pm at the Izaak Walton Building at Fairmont Park. (We have lived here for almost 30 years and never heard of this place.) Please participate in our democracy and attend. If you have a conflict, please inform yourself and watch the video of the event before casting your vote.

Legally we can do whatever we want there,” Hudson said. “The city wasn’t required to preserve any of it.”

Not only shameful, but an orchestrated event..

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! WE JUST CAN’T SPELL! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT: THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

April 23, 2012 I wrote this email letter to the DA’s office to Vicki Hightower, Chief Deputy District Attorney, Special Prosecution Section, addressing concerns and frustrations.

Four days later, this letter of determination along with an article by City Manager Scott Barber was posted on Scott Barber’s Blog Site. This letter was sent to Mary Figueroa, as opposed to myself directly, and is dated March 29, 2012.

If you have been attending or watching recent City Council meetings, then you probably have heard statements from a group of citizens alleging a variety of inappropriate actions, such as favoritism towards a local developer, unauthorized spending by our former City Manager, loans from the sewer fund to the Redevelopment Agency (I blogged about this earlier today), and funds used to demolish property for the “Raincross” development. Yesterday, the City received a copy of the determination letter from the District Attorney’s Office, along with a list of the individuals who presented the information to the DA (see the title of this blog for that list), regarding these allegations. I am pleased to share the letter with you (click on the DA Letter link to read) and to let you know that the DA concluded that no criminal acts occurred as a result of the City’s actions.

Are you for real? it’s on. Are you guys really serious that you put this in writing? This letter will be sent to the Attorney General and the State Controller and let’s see what they have to say. the city spinners are at it again and now they have the DA in their pocket. Wait till the feds see this. Scott, the city is in big enough trouble as it is and you are going to try and challenge us. Go for it!!! If you are really transparent, post this. You might actually get someone to read your blog, because we are going to post our response. This took the DA a year to respond? Get a grip.

__________________

One can see that if citizens have concerns locally with city officials in violation of the city charter, where do they take their concerns for investigation, if not District Attorney Paul Zellerbach’s office? Any guesses?

This is the problem and the following scenario is reflective of this, as noted in Mary Shelton’s blog five before midnight, how do you investigate an official and have him sponsor a fundraiser at the same time? This is why investigations of politicians conduct can’t be local.

Again, the determination of our concerns was assessed by a one time meeting and never followed through appropriately with a secondary or tertiary meeting. Or in our estimation never investigated appropriately to the satisfaction of our community and individual concerns, of which was expected by this department.

First, Vicki Hightower, had our contact information on file, it’s quite paradoxical that she asked that the letter be forwarded, since there was no contact information. She does have our email, and further, the DA’s office has been quite adept at collecting and filing our articles regarding TMC postings. We consider the DA’s office quite resourceful at attaining this information if necessary. So, I’d like to address this question, the primary reason are group of concerned citizens contacted and met with District Attorney Paul Zellerbach, was the issue of Connie Leach, whereby the contracts and issues of concern will come out shortly. The items listed in the letter coincidently received by Mr. Barber, were discussed, but not the primary reason for contacting the DA. By the way, I’d like to take this time to thank Mr. Barber for giving me top billing in his posting title. You may observe, the issue of Connie Leach is not mentioned in this letter. The meeting took place in confidence, and we were unaware of the possible collaborations between city officials and the district attorney’s office thereafter the breach. But questions arose regarding the associations between the DA, the City and The Grand Jury, not only when you view campaign support, but there close association within the working environment. What’s quite interesting was the file of TMC articles the DA’s office had in their possession and their request to know who were the writers. The cards appeared to change before our eyes. Were we being the ones investigated?

Who would be the the enforcement agency regards to city charter violations , if not the DA’s office? According to the letter, in many instances they are washing their hands of any responsibility. It is our understanding and the accepted standard in other cities that the DA’s office is responsible for enforcing any violations of the City Charter etc.

Sewer Fund Loans; not sure why the DA’s office is playing symantics with us, but the ordinance is very clear, it states exactly what these funds should be used for. It appears that the DA’s argument remains toward the premise that ‘nothing in the ordinance specifically prohibits the specified loans’. Bingo, that is also correct, there argument is that ‘nothing specifically states you can’t’. A DA diversion? But again the ordinance is very clear on what the funds should be used for. It states that such revenue (sewer) shall not be used for the acquisition or construction of new street sewers or lateral as distinquished from the main trunk, interceptor or outfall sewers. So therefore, why would monies from the sewer fund be transferred from a local City fund to a State Agency (RDA) in what is know as an ‘inter-agency” loan. When RDA is reflective of an agency of new construction, and the ordinance states this money cannot be used for new construction. The DA’s office went on to say that if there was such a provision, it still would not be a crime for the District Attorney’s office to address, because it would be a violation of the City ordinance. So who would be the appropriate source of contact for this concern? We have been told it is the DA’s office. We wouldn’t think for a moment that it could be the City. Whereby the city would investigate themselves on this violations. So the question remains.. Again, the DA’s office did not address the concern clearly, except to say that if there was not an ordinance saying you could not make a loan from the Sewer Fund., and of course this is also correct. There is none. But they didn’t consider the ordinance at its’ direct face value? In doing so, do ordinances, provisions and laws truly mean anything at all?

A loan from the Sewer fund to RDA, would be consider an ‘inter-agency’ loan. Even then would have to serve a sewer purpose. Again the DA diverts attention from his office to allow the City Manager Scott Barber to state no criminal actions occurred within the auspices of the DA’s office. Though, the DA states, if there was an ordinance, which there is, it would a ‘violation of the city ordinance’. So who enforces violations of city ordinances? Please Mr.DA, you know exactly what the intended meaning of this charter ordinance meant?

Item #2: City Manager Discretionary Spending

Response by the DA’s office regarding former City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary spending.

Former City Manager Brad Hudson’s total discretionary spending as indicated below.

Brad Hudson’s discretionary spending. City Manager Scott Barber addressed this issue in a posting. I also responded.

Ability to enter into contracts up to $50,000.00 is available to City Manager, not all department heads. Contractual agreements up to $50,000.oo without council approval was entered in after the firing of former City Manager George Carvahlos. Mr. Carvahlos was a true Riversidian and was against much of what the current council wanted. Which included Ed Adkison, Frank Schiavone, Steve Adams and Mayor Ron Loveridge. Hudson was brought in and the contractual agreement clause was raised from $25,000.00 to $50,000.00. Fifty thousand is alot of money, and again their were no guidelines which encompassed the proper spending of that amount to prevent spending abuses. One could spend $50,000.00 daily, or one could spend incremental amounts in what is known as bid splitting. Again Mr. Zellerbach, we are talking about apples and oranges when comparing the City Manager’s discretionary spending for fiscal year 2009/2010 is $299,685.00 when compared with Parks and Recreation of $2,000,000.00. Our public records for City Manager’s discretionary spending for fiscal year 2009/ 2010 for contracts under $50,000.00 comes out to $29,554,005.19. You also state that the 2009/2010 discretionary spending under $50,000.00 is $299,685.00. You are off by $29,254,320.19… I don’t think you are seeing the complete spending picture, these are contracts under $50,000.00 approved under City Manager’s or Department Heads authority. The City Manager is ultimately responsible for all spending even over the Department Heads authority. Therefore, the amount in oversight by the City Manager is $29,254,320.19.

Item #3: Favoritism to Mark Rubin (developer)

Response by DA’s office regarding favoritism by the City of Riverside toward developer Mark Rubin.

Dennis Morgan (aka. Larry the Liquidator) of IPA, which is the contracted property management company for all the City of Riverside’s properties. Why does he also manage properties of Developer Mark Rubin, to what was mentioned at a land use committee meeting of in the neighborhood of 15,000 sq. ft. Mark Rubin is a property developer for the city, one of the properties is the vacant and unfinished Raincross Promenade project.” They even exchanged accolades at a Land Use Committee meeting in which they acknowledge themselves as “compadres”, in my estimation, as a figure of speech in regards to their close ties. We have several witnessed who will attest that this occurred at a land use committee meeting. But I guess it is not pertinent enough for the DA to address this issue on a constructive basis that would allow pertinent information to evolve..

The last statement Barber makes, “the DA concluded that no criminal acts occurred as a result of the City’s actions”. According to the DA’s office in reference to property transfers they do address the fact that the City of Riverside did violate the law, and this concern should be forwarded to the State Attorney General. What is important to notice is that there is no criminal action to warrant action by his office. That does not mean a serious criminal violation hasn’t occurred, it only means that the DA’s office is not the appropriate entity to handle it. For example, the City of Riverside has created a resolution which does not allow Marijuana dispensaries within the City, even though at the State level it is legal, at the Federal level it is illegal. The city can now stop the dispensary and cite them for violations, but they cannot take their property. The Feds can. Therefore a different office of government and must be called by the city to do just that. This would be the Department of Justice. The taking of property is known as ‘asset forfeiture.’

Again the DA states if this allegation occurred in (b) it would be a violation of RDA guidelines, not the DA’s responsibility. If it isn’t there responsibility, isn’t it there responsibility to direct us to the appropriate office that could address our concerns?

Favoritism by the City toward Mark Rubin cannot be documented, that is true. I agree with the DA’s office, this would be a hard nut to crack without solid evidence, such as bribery. But is it plausible to connect favoritism to the definition of nepotism? Nepotism occurs in the city, but never addressed. We have an instance such former councilman and mayoral candidate Ed Adkison at the Friday Morning Club Janet Goeskie Senior Center on February 23, 2012 stating that the City’s relationship with Connie Leach was ‘nepotism’. Adkison was on the council during the Connie Leach allegations. We also had councilman Steve Adams brother reviewing red light camera tickets.

Do you think if a Councilman received a ticket violation would they fulfill their obligation to pay it? Or would it be surprisingly cleared from the system? According to the DA, favoritism in their office must indicate documented bribery, otherwise it is out of the DA’s scope of practice. No documentation indicates bribery between the City of Riverside and developer Mark Rubin.

Item #4: Raincross property:

Response by the DA’s office regarding the demolition of the Swiss Inn, a Raincross property.

In the DA’s response, it shows the address to be 3120 Main Street, whereby it should read 3210 Main Street. Our records show that the developer Mark Rubin owned the property when the City paid Dakeno demolition for the work on Mark Rubin’s property. City acquired the property initially, transferred back to Mark Rubin, then flipped it back to the city. The city did pay for demolition by Dakeno on the Swiss Inn property owned by developer Mark Rubin. The City of Riverside paid for demolition according to the document which stated payment from the discretionary fund account on 03/06/2007, and Mark Rubin, developer, was still in posession of the property until 05/22/2008 when it was transferred to RDA. According to the title company, the owner, Enrique Martinez transferred title on 11/09/2006

The following document shows that payment of $44,770.00 as indicated in the notation in the above document from former City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary fund.

CLICK IMAGE TO SEE FULL DOCUMENT

The above document is on page 231 of former City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary sprending account for the amount $44,770.00 indicated in the above notion referring to Fund 476 University Corridor/ Sycamore Canyon Capital Project paid to Dakeno Demolition.

09/19/2006: Redevelopment memorandum-item #11, Resolution of necessity to acquire 1st to 3rd properties-approved by city council, no resolution document exists, therefore no land acquisition should have taken place or developer (Rubin) was required to put into escrow monies to acquire property, pay for demolition, clearance, and relocation fees. 5.4 million dollar sewer transfer took place to pay for relocation, clearance, and demolition fees, deposited into escrow fund. 5.4 million sewer inter-fund transfer occurs according to council report but the sewer fund is not the loan of record, the worker’s comp and the electric fund are the receivable loan until August, 09 Money is not moved from the sewer-fund until August of 2009. Money is posted to sewer fund June 30, 2009. Why would an employee fraudulently back-date the postings of the sewer fund?

Response by the DA’s office regarding the issue of illegally transferring Redevelopment properties back to the City.

OK Scott, did we miss the part of the transfer of 149 properties from the Redevelopment Agency back to the City before the June deadline? We brought this to City Council a year ago, and was discounted. Even you City Attorney must have missed this one, or even your $400 per hour Best, Best & Krieger outside legal help missed this one. This was a violation by the city that the DA addressed, but was not addressed or mentioned on your blog appropriately in detail by you. Knowingly that a violation had occurred, is it not in the DA’s position to forward this to be investigated by the State Attorney General?

Regarding Connie Leach, former Chief of Police Russell Leach’s wife. TMC will post our concerns and allegations that the DA’s office and the Riverside Grand Jury to our knowledge, considered baseless, or without merit. But questions still remain regarding the use of Police Asset Forfeiture funds in payment to Connie Leach, while her husband Police Chief Russell Leach was in charge. Our position will posted.

What we find is that the DA’s office is not the appropriate office to address our concerns and allegations. Though, when asked who would handle violations of charter at the City level, we were directed to the DA’s office. But all local entities were exhausted, we went to the appropriate entities at the State and Federal levels. Yes this is all true, Scott is right, no criminal actions at the DA level, and I’m sure no criminal actions at the City level, because as you would also find, that the City Attorney, Gregory Priamos would call this baseless. Some may say that this is a system created by a few, to work for a few. But I believe there continues to be something wrong with this picture. Something that reflects a triage of influence by these entities. Creating a difficult arena for local residents to address their concern without some sort of retribution, slanderously or financially, or what some in the city say, ‘client control’ tactics. And that is my opinion. It may be right, it may be wrong but we will continue to investigate and learn the language of municipal politics.. Final word, we do appreciate City Manager Scott Barbers dialogue.

But we have to remember the DA’s office never addressed the issue of federal cold plates, illegal gun sales, illegal badges, fillegal law enforcement/emergency lights, fraudulently and illegally applying for concealed weapons permit with a false address, overlooking DUI’s and ticket fixing. If this was anyone other than those in the office, such as the common citizen, we’d be in jail, and people have one to jail. Of course, these violations would not be handled by the DA’s office, which is actually true…but again …who would? And if they were responsible for oversight of these violations, would they actually mitigate them? And would they contact or forward these issues to the proper legal authority?

Is there a triangle of influence connecting the City, DA and Grand Jury? Is there a quadrangle of influence connecting the City, DA, Grand Jury and Judges? Is there actually a pentagonal angle of influence which would involve the State? Pentagonal in the sense that what do citizens do when they have utilized all resources without any reasonable response? We have addressed this pressing issue in a TMC article. These would include the City Attorney’s Office, the District Attorney’s Office, the Grand Jury, the Superior Court Judges, and now possibly the State? Are only hope is those offices outside the State. Such as the IRS, Security and Exchange Commission, the Department of Justice, the FBI etc.

What do you do as a concerned citizen when the majority of the City Council is tied in with the Distric Attorney Paul Zellerbach?

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO VIEW THE PIC.

Some public servants have said to bring such issues to the forefront is to ‘political’. Even if the issues are right, they will not act on it, therefore leaving a conclusion that is vague and clandestine. Therefore giving reason that the public is not important. It then appears that one completely discounts the oath that was taken to serve, and placing their own interest as primary, superseding the public interest. This is what most people in the community feel and are angry about. Further, voters don’t vote because they feel it does’nt really matter..and in many ways they are right. But they need to get involve at a different level. I do feel at some levels that this letter was ‘orchestrated’ and ‘designed’ in many way by one or more political elements within city to divert and mitigate the actual concerns of the public as simply having no merit. Further, to strategically label us as uninformed individuals. This would only safeguard their political compulsory obligations to maintain their positions, supporting constituents and of course the ‘status quo atmosphere of illusionary stability’. Another aspect to remember is that the DA’s office did not take upon themselves to even investigate our allegations. They made their opinion simply on our one time meeting and the information we submitted that needed further investigation by his office, which was not done. A step further, their opinion may have allegedly been made after contact with the city, further breaching our confidence as concerned citizens. Many of these issues, according to District Attorney Paul Zellerbach’s Office, simply must be forwarded to the State Attorney’s Office, of course, we assume, the appropriate office to deal with these issues. City violations of the City Charter, as we understand, are to be directed toward the DA’s office. But what we are told by the DA, “was it illegal or just bad business”? Our we to accept as concerned citizens that bad business is an acceptable premise for city business? City business that doesn’t have a public or constituent benefit? When does bad business cross the line? When does it cross the line into the gray line of illegal? Our these departments of oversight really there to be good fiscal stewards of the people in which they took an oath to protect and serve? If you view the premise of this blog article, this is more of a hit piece against Vivian Moreno, Dvonne Pritruzzello and Mary Figueroa by DA Paul Zellerbach and Riverside City Manager Scott Barber to discredit their concerns or mitigate their allegations? Can we call it collusion? Regardless, what can I say, ‘This is Riverside’.

Again, our concerns were originally with Connie Leach, and TMC will be posting our findings in “Hush Money II” that were suddenly rejected by the Riverside Grand Jury, without fully investigating each respondent and fully evaluating the documents submitted and requested from the City of Riverside. The Grand Jury had requested asset forefeiture records from the City of Riverside and failed to continue their interview process in order to fully complete their investigation. Instead, decided to relieve themselves of their duty to act on citizens concerns by acting not to act. Was the result allegedly orchestrated or meticulously created by design in order to mitigate any unintended repercussions?

Considering the DA’s TMC article file (kinda reminds me of Hoovers FBI files), considering the questions that were asked, in turn, were we actually the ones being interviewed? Was this a last ditch effort in their process to protect the family? Were we actually dancing around the issues?… and a final question, what is your connection with local Attorney Virginia Blumenthal ingrained on your ribbon above the tutu? and how many are truly ingrained within the family called ‘Riverside’?

Once again, PE proves only certain opinions are acceptable here. Good job, airjackie and kensew, you have achieved media sactioned thinking. – censordefier, Commenter on the Press Enterprise

or

are commenters actually the ones censoring?

The problem with this comment section is there is no moderator. If a reader doesn’t like your comment, they report it as abuse and it’s collapsed. It’s supposed to be reviewed by a moderator but the PE has gutted it’s staff to generate profits so your comment will never be read and reinstated. In this case, it’s the illegal alien supporters collapsing the comments they oppose. Notice it’s only people who oppose the president’s stupid move that have been collapsed and the pro stupid move remain. Test it yourself. Report one of them and they’re comment will disappear as well. Terrible setup here. – crymeariver, commenter on the PE

Other commenters make a case in point that comments with the highest approval ratings are being deleted or removed, especially when the comments don’t violate their guidelines..

TMC had our own comments regarding redlight cameras as revenue enhancers over safety issues. While Councilman Paul Davis voted against the renewal contract back in 2011, Councilman Andy Melendrez voted for it, Councilwoman Nany Hart voted for it, Chris MacArthur voted for it, Councilman Steve Adams must have voted for it to keep his keep his redlight camera reviewer brother Ron Adams working, Mayoral Candidate/ current Councilman William “Rusty” Bailey and Independent Voice for Riverside voted for it, even “I have no such plans to run for mayor”, of course, mayoral candidate and current Councilman Mike Gardner voted for it. And voted for it as a safety issue, as opposed to a revenue enhancer, and discounting studies countering the psuedo statistics they were provided.

But to now lose $1,154,000.00 in anticipated revenue projections according to City Manager Scott Barbers proposed budget? The question remained that it was a bad deal last year when the proposal to renew the contract went in front of Council. Councilman Paul Davis saw through it and didn’t vote for it, the rest did, and now how will they vote this time? Vote for renewal, is a vote to continue hard earned taxpayer money down the toilet.

When Ken Champou asked Flynn asked, “Why can’t people vote to get rid of them”? Flynn responded referring to the people, “they were misinformed”.

UPDATE: 06/17/2012: SACRAMENTO BEE: EDITORIAL: TIME FOR CALIFORNIA TO PUT AN END TO ‘DOUBLE DIPPING’?Case in hand, editorial mentions former Riverside City Manager and current Sacramento County Executive Officer Brad Hudson. Currently, it appears that ‘double dipping’ is a public sector phenomenon, whereby some government workers can retire as early as age 50, receive a CalPERS pension check and get another government job. You better believe this would never occur in the private sector, because you are dealing with company money, and it is watched carefully. In the public sector where taxpayer money funds salaries and pensions, it may appear to some government representatives guarding the till as ‘funny money’.

According to the editorial this type of activity show a failure, a failure to recruit and groom entry level and midlevel people to replace aging baby boomers. Currently, if a retiree recieves a pension and a government salary, it appears that retiree no longer contributes to the pension system, therefore placing a strain on an already strained public pension system. But if one transfers from a different local which has their own pension program, to new local with their own, this scenerio wouldn’t apply. So it ask the question, “Should California do what New York does”? Retired government workers under 65 who return to public employment cannot receive pension payments if eartnings reach beyond $30,000.00. Questions arose when current Riverside Police Chief Sergio Diaz retired from the Los Angeles Police Department, as Deputy Chief at 55 years of age in March 31, 2010, to begin his new job of Riverside Police Chief July 1, 2010. Diaz was hired by former City Manager Brad Hudson, and in unison with former Assistant City Manager Tom Desantis.

UPDATE: 06/18/2012: YELLOW BRICK ROAD TO EMERALD CITY?

I told you a thousand times, Chief Diaz say’s you need a permit for the costumes or the next time you’ll be arrested…

The City of Riverside has been labeled the ‘All American City’ in 1998, and christened the first ‘Emerald City’ in 2009, all we need now is the ‘Yellow Brick Road’? The City of Redland’s has it’s ‘Orange Blossom Trail’ ( which in my opinion should have fittingly been in Riverside), the City of Indianapolis has it’s ‘Cultural Trail’, so why not? Let’s build a yellow brick road.

According to the Press Enterprise the biggest concerns are the loans the city made to the redevelopment agency. Ramirez said they were legal when they were done, which was long before the 2011 bill that ended redevelopment existed. State officials have cited the law’s section that says loans between the city and redevelopment agency are not “enforceable obligations.” In other words, ‘not legal’.. Ramirez goes on to say that at the June 16 meeting what started out as $158 million in questionable Enforeable Obligations by the State, that $60 million of that was unknowingly added as a ‘book keeping line item’. This $60 million with 2 other similar items which add up to what he is calling ‘ the $80 million mistake’, which the State says are not payable. This would appear to mean that the taxpayer is responsible for this $80 million??? and the ‘Ramirez Spin’ continues, if it shouldn’t have been there to begin with, it was never there?

UPDATE: 06/19/2012: NOW IF ANYONE WHO LIVES IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE KNOWS, IF THEY WERE TO TURN PLANS OR ATTEMPTED TO CHANGE THEIR WOODSTREET HOME, OR JUST DO IT ANYWAY, WOULDN’T WE HAVE THE WRATH OF CODE ENFORCEMENT ON THE RESIDENT? THEN HAVING TO RATIONALIZE WITH COMMADANT PRIAMOS OR EXPERIENCE SEVERE FINES? SO HOW DOES THIS HAPPEN AT ALL? OH, THESE ARE THE NEW RENDERINGS SUBMITTED FOR THE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY, AMONG OTHERS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. NOT SURE AT THIS TIME, WHAT ARCHITECT SUBMITTED THEM OR HOW MUCH TAXPAYER MONEY WAS PAID, BUT CERTAINLY FLOWS WITH THE EARLY CALIFORNIA REVIVAL? AROUND DOWNTOWN? OR DOES IT? BUT CLICK THIS LINK TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUND OF THE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU. PROUDLY RATED ONE STAR (POSSIBLY DOWN TO ZERO FROM OUR LAST ACCOUNTS) OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR GOOD REASON, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST, FOR GOOD REASON… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPHALL SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR CONTACT US BY THE FOLLOWING EMAIL ADDRESS! CONTRIBUTORS WILL ALWAYS BE PROTECTED… YES, WE EXPECT THE JAIL TIME FOR THAT ONE… THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

CITY OF RIVERSIDE MAYORS RACE: FINAL TALLY: 96/96 100% AS OF 1:30AM 06/06/2012. COUNCILMAN WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY WINS TOP POSITION OF THIS MAYORS ELECTION THE MAYORS POSITION, WHILE FORMER COUNCILMAN ED ADKISON CLOSES AT SECOND, CURRENT COUNCILMAN MIKE GARDNER AT THIRD, AND COUNCILMAN ANDY MELENDREZ AT FOURTH! THAT MEANS THERE WILL BE A RUNOFF THIS NOVEMBER BETWEEN CURRENT COUNCILMAN WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY AND FORMER COUNCILMAN ED ADKISON.

WARD 3 WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY WILL BE SPEAKING AT THE FRIDAY MORNING CLUB APRIL 6, 2012, AT THE JANET GOESKE SENIOR CENTER, ROOM D, 5257 SIERRA ST. (AT THE CORNER OF STREETER), RIVERSIDE, CA FROM 10:00AM TO 11:30AM. http://www.rustybailey.com

OCCUPY RIVERSIDE MARCHED IN PROTEST OF POLICE BRUTALITY IN FRONT OF THE RPD ORANGE STREET STATION. STORIES OF PHYSICAL ABUSE BEHIND THE DOORS OF THE RPD PROCESSING CENTER ARE TOLD. ALL ELEVEN ARRESTED WERE EVALUATED FOR INJURIES AT LOCAL HOSPITALS AFTER THEIR RELEASE. FESTIVAL OF LIGHTS PREPARATION SEEN, A WEEK AFTER CITY OF RIVERSIDE LEADERS CALL FOR REMOVAL OF OCCUPIER TENT CITY BY RPD SWAT. IT APPEARS THAT THE CALL WAS DONE TO CLEAR MAIN STREET FOR THIS FESTIVE OCCASION, BUT WILL THEIR BE A FESTIVAL OF LIGHTS THIS NOVEMBER 25, 2011, WITH CHRISTMAS SONGS OF PEACE ON EARTH AND GOODWILL TO ALL, OR A FESTIVAL OF RIGHTS?

AND WE CURRENTLY HAVE AN EERIE SYMBOLIC CAGE OF DANGER, DO NOT ENTER, AROUND THE STATUE OF MARTIN LUTHER KING WALKING TOWARD RIVERSIDE CITY HALL WITH A LEGENDARY QUOTE BEHIND HIM….

FREE SPEECH QUOTE FROM BEN FRANKLIN IN FRONT OF RIVERSIDE CITY HALL. THIS SIGN WAS DONE THREE TIMES BECAUSE FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON DIDN’T LIKE THE SEAMS. OF COURSE, AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE… WHAT WE NEED TO REMEMBER IS THAT WE COULD HAVE FED THOSE WHO NEEDED TO BE FED IN THE COMMUNITY FOR SIX MONTHS, AS OPPOSE TO SOMEONE’S PERSONAL VISION AT TAXPAYERS EXPENSE…

THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE LOVES IT’S RULES, WE HAVE RULES ON PARKING, RULES ON WHAT YOU CAN DO ON THE MALL, WE EVEN HAVE RULES ON WHAT CAN BE DONE ON RPD GRASS…

WITNESSED BY THOSE AROUND, THE LIGHT WAS RED, NOT SURE WHY, BUT RPD VEHICLE HITS THE GAS, THIS WAS RPD VEHICLE NUMBER 3927. WHILE OCCUPIER CROSSES THE STREET. WELCOME TO RIVERSIDE AND THE UPCOMING FESTIVAL OF RIGHTS, FESTIVAL OF LIGHTS THIS NOVEMBER 25, 2011. THE QUESTION IS, WILL WE HAVE MORE CANDY CANES THROWN OR RPD BATONS THROWN?

I was walking down Main Street and saw the heavily closed off islands of grass with newly applied manure, a tree and a sign. Which then reminded me of a quote by Thomas Jefferson, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” Are many of our forefathers quotes coming back to remind and warn us that we as individuals must take responsibility for the course that government has taken?

UNKNOWINGLY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

Somehow the City Fathers and Mother, have done something right. Whatever it is, we are finally seeing growing amount of visitors in Downtown Riverside. They are shopping, eating at local restaurants etc. Antonious Pizza owner Teresa Andrawis said protesters have given her business a little boost. They are called Occupy Riverside. But today, the Lord’s Day, the City of Riverside, under the leadership of Chief Sergio Diaz decided it was a good day to end, what many consider a legal and lawful constitutional right to assemble. TMC was also told that the Occupy Riverside’s permit is still active, but we were also told some weeks back by an Occupyer that they would be there till Saturday, November 5, 2011. Therefore, the question remains. Regardless, SWAT dressed up in full tactical gear, glocks locked and loaded, and onward went Emerald City’s finest to disrupt and arrest the occupying Americans participating in a legal assembly. Why the disruption? Is it possible the city feared the repercussions of Oakland? Eleven arrested, tents disasembled and removed, but who’s to argue with a .45? Riverside PE, how come your not reporting this? Hopefully you didn’t receive that infamous lecture from the Chief on responsible reporting? OK, I was just joking.. Then there was the infamous bottle of soda that started it all, as stated by City of Riverside’s Chief Sergio Diaz himself, according to the PE. So then there would be broken glass? Protestors stated it wasn’t a bottle of soda, as the Chief indicates, it was a full can of soda. LA Times reports that allegedly a full can of soda was thrown at the officers. Another report stated a plastic bottle of water and a full can of soda was pelted. These have now been labeled lethal weapons in Emerald City or The All American City 1998. Many have said, “lethal weapons!” Yes, but this is River City USA. You haven’t seen nothing yet, just wait till the police reports come out. But after all was said and done, the lightning and thunder then came to the City of Riverside…. and some began to ponder if this was an angry response from a higher source above, after all it was the Lord’s Day?

Occupier visually disturbed by officers hand on his shoulder, while he repeatedly ask him to remove as he does not have his permission to do so.

Occupier pleads with black police officer not hurt her friends in the chain.

Armed RPD confront two woman in the chain first…

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue oftheir currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properlybelongs. – Thomas Jefferson [1802], 3rd President of the United States.

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.” — Harry S. Truman,[August 8,1950] 33rd President of the United States.

UPDATE: 10/08/2011: ALLEGEDELY, DO WE NEED TO GET THE OCCUPIERS OUT BEFORE THE FESTIVAL OF LIGHTS, THE DAY AFTER THANKGIVING? WILL WE FIND A MORE AGRESSIVE APPROACH THEN WHAT WAS SEEN SUNDAY? THEN PLACING THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE ON THE MAP WITH GREECE, OAKLAND AND NEW YORK?

UPDATE: 11/08/2011: PROTESTER AT TODAYS RIVERSIDE CITY HALL STATES THAT RIVERSIDE POLICE FALSIFIED THE CLAIM AND CHARGE OF THE INFAMOUS BOTTLE OF WATER. THE PROTESTOR STATED HE WAS THE ONE THAT THROUGH THE PLASTIC BOTTLE OF WATER. HE WAS PART OF HOLDING THE LINE, DRANK FROM HIS BOTTLE OF WATER, TOSSED IT TO HIS FRIEND TO REFILL, FRIEND THROUGH BACK THE BOTTLE. WITH ALL THE PHONE CAMERAS, CAMERAS AND VIDEO RECORDERS, NO BOTTLE USED AS A PROJECTILE WAS FILMED OR SEEN AS CLAIMED BY POLICE CHIEF SERGIO DIAZ.

ANOTHER STATED WHO WAS LOST HIS JOB TWO WEEKS AGO, “NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU ARREST, OR BEAT ME, THE PROBLEM IS JUST NOT GOING TO GO AWAY”.

ANOTHER STATED, NEWS AGENCIES SUCH AS CNN AND THE NEW YORK TIMES WERE ASKING HER IF POLICE BRUTALITY WAS A REGULAR THING?” OCCURRENCE IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE

ANOTER STATED CHARGED WITH RESISTING ARREST, WHILE BEING PINNED UNDER A COLLAPSED CANOPY.

KAREN RENFROE GIVE THE COUNCIL A LECTURE ON FREEDOM AND LIBERTY, GETS A STANDING OVATION.

SOMEONE IN THE BACK OF THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CREATED A STIR, INTERRUPTING A SPEAKER AT THE PODIUM, AND HAD TO BE CORRECTED BY MAYOR LOVERIDGE. IT APPEARS THAT THE MAYOR KNOWS HIM BY NAME. HE WAS IDENTIFIED AS SALVADOR SANTANA, A LOCAL RIVERSIDE BLOGGER OF THE TRUTH PUBLICATION. COUNCILMEN STEVE ADAMS, MIKE GARDNER AND CHRISTOPHER MACARTHUR ARE PAYING SUPPORTERS OF THIS SITE ACCORDING TO CITY 460 DOCUMENTS.

UPDATE: 11/09/2011: REPORTS OF COMPLAINTS FROM OCCUPIERS ARE COMING IN NAMING OFFICERS ANGOLA AND MUNIZ. WHAT HAPPENED BEHIND CLOSED DOORS OF THE POLICE PROCESSING CENTER. PROFESSIONALITY IN QUESTION AND THE TREATMENT OF THE WOMEN. OTHER SOURCES STATING THE TWO WERE ALLEGEDLY FIRED AT ONE POINT, THEN REHIRED DUE TO ALLEGATIONS OF EVIDENCE PLANTING AND TAMPERING. MANY ARE ASKING WHO ARE THE REAL CRIMINALS. ONE OF THE FEMALE OCCUPIERS WHO WAS NOT PART OF THE CHAIN, SAID SHE WAS PICKED OUT BY AN OFFICER FOR WHAT SHE APPARENTLY SAID TO HIM. THE OFFICER THAN TOLD HER SHE WAS BEING ARRESTED FOR ASSAULTING HIM. WHAT HAPPENS WITHIN THE UNDERWORLD OF THE RIVERSIDE POLICE PROCESSING CENTER CANNOT BE WITNESSED BY CIVILIANS. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR ARE THE DECISION MAKERS OF WHAT OCCURS IN THE CITY, THEY ARE THE LEADERS, THE POLICE ARE ONLY THEIR FOOT SOLDIERS WHO FOLLOW THEIR ORDERS UNDER THE COMMAND OF CHIEF OF POLICE SERGIO DIAZ. KEEP CONNECTED MORE TO COME.

KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROBABLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE RIVERSIDE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR WHAT EVER REASON, AND THAT’S ALL WE’RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S, COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

MAYOR! YOU TAKING A PICTURE DOESN’T COUNT AS A CITATION. WHO TURNED THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS ALL GREEN? STEVE WAS THAT YOU? NOW LOOK WHAT HAPPENED! IS THAT RUSS IN THAT BLACK CAR? GREG WE HAVE A POSSIBLE PENDING LITIGATION AGAIN. GARDNER DID YOU FIX THAT CAMERA YET?

Red-light cameras are designed to take a picture of a car’s license plate if the driver runs a red light. These cameras are popping up in city after city as officials theorize that if drivers know they’re being watched, they’ll be less likely to run the lights. But do they work? Or is it just another way to increase city revenue from traffic tickets? Well, according to study after study, rather than improving motorist safety, red-light cameras significantly increase crashes and therefore, raise insurance premiums. In fact, the only studies that have shown any benefit to red-light cameras were either done by the IIHS ( Insurance Institute for Highway Safety). The IIHS, funded by automobile insurance companies, is the leading advocate for red-light cameras since insurance companies can profit from red-light cameras by way of higher premiums due to increased crashes and citations. Biased studies, absolutely! The most recent study revealing the truth about the cameras was done by researchers at the University of South Florida College of Public Health. “The rigorous studies clearly show red-light cameras don’t work,” said lead author Barbara Langland-Orban, professor and chair of health policy and management at the USF College of Public Health. “Instead, they increase crashes and injuries as drivers attempt to abruptly stop at intersections.” Comprehensive studies from North Carolina, studies from Virginia, and studies from Ontario have all reported cameras are associated with increases in crashes. The study by the Virginia Transportation Research Council also found that cameras were linked to increased crash costs. The only studies that conclude cameras reduced crashes or injuries contained “major research design flaws,” such as incomplete data or inadequate analyses, and were always conducted by researchers with links to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Apparently, the findings have been known for some time. A 2001 paper by the Office of the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives reported that red-light cameras are “a hidden tax levied on motorists.” The report came to the same conclusions that all of the other valid studies have, that red-light cameras are associated with increased crashes and that the timings at yellow lights are often set too short to increase tickets for red-light running. That’s right, the state actually tampers with the yellow light settings to make them shorter, and more likely to turn red as you’re driving through them. In fact, six U.S. cities have been found guilty of shortening the yellow light cycles below what is allowed by law on intersections equipped with cameras meant to catch red-light runners. Those local governments have completely ignored the safety benefit of increasing the yellow light time and decided instead to utilize red-light cameras, shorten the yellow light duration, and collect the profits instead. The cities in question include Union City, CA, Dallas and Lubbock, TX, Nashville and Chattanooga, TN, and Springfield, MO, according to Motorists.org, which collected information from reports from around the country. This isn’t the first time traffic cameras have been questioned as to their effectiveness in preventing accidents. In one case, the local government was forced to issue refunds by more than $1 million to motorists who were issued tickets for running red lights. Some have even gone to the extent of questioning the constitutionality of it all. Others are stating that every American Citizen has the right to face their accuser, and not an innanimate object such as a red light camera. Others are stating they are unenforceable because they are impropery served, therefore can be legally ignored. Others recommend to completely avoid them using side streets, since some of these intersections have become accident pits.

Apparently, the findings have been known for some time. A 2001 paper by the Office of the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives reported that red-light cameras are “a hidden tax levied on motorists.” The report came to the same conclusions that all of the other valid studies have come to, that red-light cameras are associated with increased crashes and that the timings at yellow lights are often set too short to increase tickets for red-light running. That’s right, the state actually tampers with the yellow light settings to make them shorter, and more likely to turn red as you’re driving through them. In fact, six U.S. cities have been found guilty of shortening the yellow light cycles below what is allowed by law on intersections equipped with cameras meant to catch red-light runners. Those local governments have completely ignored the safety benefit of increasing the yellow light time and decided instead to utilize red-light cameras, shorten the yellow light duration, and collect the profits instead. The cities in question include Union City, CA, Dallas and Lubbock, TX, Nashville and Chattanooga, TN, and Springfield, MO, according to Motorists.org, which collected information
from reports from around the country. This isn’t the first time traffic cameras have been questioned as to their effectiveness in preventing accidents. In one case, the local government was forced to issue refunds by more than $1 million to motorists who were issued tickets for running red lights.

Then there are the snitch tickets, sent out by the police in an effort to fool the registered owner into identifying the actual driver of the car. The truth about traffic cameras is that the real motivation behind the programs is revenue, not safety. For this reason, the systems are often rigged to guarantee a large yield of tickets. In Fairfax County, at the intersection of U.S. 50 and Fair Ridge Drive, the yellow light was shortened just three days after the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors signed a contract to implement red-light cameras in October 1999. When the longer yellow time was restored in
2001, violations decreased by 90 percent. In 2007, the Virginia Department of Transportation documented a 29 percent increase in accidents and a 19 percent increase in injuries at red-light camera intersections. This is because drivers slam on their brakes or speed up to try to avoid getting a camera ticket, thus causing more accidents. If Virginia lawmakers are really interested in safety rather than revenue, they will follow Georgia’s lead and lengthen yellow lights and ditch their traffic cameras.

I have never personally received a red light ticket by the camera but I think it does more harm than good. There is one in Riverside off Arlington and Indiana street that caused an accident as the flash was too bright and caused the driver to have a seizure and she was hit and she died as a result. Also there are other crimes the city or county can spend it’s money on besides a camera to catch and ticket drivers who run red lights. – Nicole Lewis, Commenter on the PE

KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND THAT’S ALL WE’RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

UPDATE: 10/25/2011: 1:00 pm CITY COUNCILS SESSION DURING PUBLIC COMMENT SESSION: THE QUESTION OF MANIPULATION OF THE TIMING OF THOSE CAMERA’S COME UP MICHAEL ARCT STATES THERE IS NO STANDARDS, LEGAL MINIMUMS FOR A LEFT HAND TURN IS 3.0 SECONDS. COMMON SENSE TO LEGALLY MAKE A LEFT HAND TURN SAFELY IT TAKES 3.6 SECONDS, WHICH YOU WILL FIND AT THE INTERSECTION OF TYLER AND W. BOUND 91, RUNNED BY CAL TRANS. IF YOU GO TO VAN BUREN AND INDIANA RUNNED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, A LEFT HAND TURN IS 3.0 SECONDS. ALSO ASKED IF COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS WILL ABSTAIN FROM THIS VOTE SINCE HIS BROTHER, RON ADAMS REVIEWS RED CAMERA PHOTO VIOLATIONS FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. TMC FOUND RON ADAMS NAME ON THE CITY MANAGER’S DISCRETIONARY FUND FOR CONTRACTS UNDER $50,000.00 FROM FISCAL YEARS 2008/2009 AND 2009/2010, ATTACHMENT “C”. DURING EVENING SESSION PRESENTATION, 67% OF THE THE RED LIGHT CAMERA PHOTO’S ARE THROWN OUT, THUS REENFORCING THE PREMISS OF AN INNANIMATE OBJECT BEING MORE INACCURATE THAN PREVIOUSLY PERCEIVED. MORE SO, WHEN DRIVERS APPROACH A RED LIGHT INTERSECTION, THEY BECOME MORE FOCUSED ON THE LIGHT AND THE CAMERA, THUS THEIR ATTENTION OFF THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF THEM, AS WELL AS BICYLCLIST AND PEDESTRIANS. THIS BRINGING TO THE FOREFRONT A SAFETY ISSUE NOT ADDRESSED.

UPDATE:10/25/2011: 9:00pm: COUNCIL APPROVES REDLIGHT CONTRACT 5/2. WITH NO VOTES BY COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS AND CHRIS MAC ARTHUR. STILL FOR THE MOST PART THIS DECISION REFLECTS HOW REGRESSIVE OF A CITY WE ARE AS OPPOSED TO BEING PROGRESSIVE. THE KOO-LAID KEEPS FLOWING, AND COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS DIDN’T ABSTAIN FROM THIS VOTE, EVEN THOUGH HIS BROTHER RON ADAMS, BENEFITS. THIS IS NOT ABOUT RUNNING A RED LIGHT BECAUSE NO ONE THINKS WITH INTENT TO RUN A RED LIGHT. IF YOU ARE IN THE LEFT HAND LANE TO MAKE A LEFT TURN YOU ARE AT THE MERCY OF THE LIGHT ON THAT TURN. MORE VIOLATIONS ARE MADE WITH LEFT HAND TURNS, DUE DIRECTLY TO THE TIMING, NOT BECAUSE OF THE DRIVERS INTENT TO RUN A RED LIGHT. THE COUNCIL DOESN’T REALIZE THE EXCESSIVENESS OF THE THE $500.00 FINE, SOME CALL IT HIGHWAY ROBBERY OR POLICING FOR PROFIT. STUDIES HAVE SHOW THAT RED LIGHT CAMERA TOWNS HAVE DETERED VISITORS ALTOGETHER. NOT TO MENTION, PARKING CITATIONS. BUT WHAT DOES THE COMMUNITY EXPECT WITH THIS COUNCIL, THEY DIDN’T LISTEN TO US WHEN WE EXPRESSED OUR OPINION REGARDING AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE. OTHERS SAY SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE OBLIGATORY REASONS FOR THEIR DECISIONS. IN PAST YEARS THE CITY WOULD JUST SPEND, SPEND, SPEND; NOW THEY ARE FINING, FINING, FINING, TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE OF MONETARY WAIST WASTE.

UPDATE:10/26/2011: Allegations by city employee insiders indicate that there are city employees who have had red light infractions and are removed. One was actually promoted up the ranks. Many in the community are asking the questions of double standards. While Councilman Mike Gardner feels if you run a red light you should pay the excessive $500.00 fine. The questions the community is asking, are there different rules for council people, city executives and employees compared to the community? Well, the dirt keeps coming in! Employee insiders are also alleging that Former Councilman Frank Schiavone and girlfriend whom have had dozens of infractions, just get them removed. It appears that the infractions allegedly go to the city and Councilman’s Steve Adams brother, Ron Adams who works at city hall, and are then removed from further action.

UPDATE: 12/11/2011: EVEN CITIES SUCH AS PHARR, TEXAS HAS DECIDED TO REMOVE RED LIGHT CAMERAS, AND HAVE FOUND THEIR IS NO DICERNABLE SAFETY BENEFIT. WHAT MAKES THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE FEEL THEIR IS? IS IT THE SAME AS THE STREETSWEEPERS GOING DOWN THE WOODSTREETS FOLLOWED BY CITATION VEHICLES AS WOODSTREET RESIDENTS HAVE INDICATED, FOR NO OTHER REASON BUT TO ISSUE CITATIONS. COUCILMAN MIKE GARDNER CONTINUES TO TURN A BLIND EYE ON REALITY, AND CONTINUES TO SUPPORT A SILENT EAR ON THE COMMUNITY. EVEN PHARR CHIEF OF POLICE RUBEN VILLESCAS AGREES, WHILE OUR CHIEF OF POLICE SERGIO DIAZ CONTINUES TO SUPPORT “STATUS QUO”. CHIEF OF POLICE RUBEN VILLESCAS STATES, ” FEW, IF ANY, ACCIDENTS ARE FOR RUNNING A RED LIGHT”. THERE IS NO DOUBT, THAT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE NEEDS REAL LEADERSHIP, WHICH STANDS TO PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY AT LARGE, AND THEIR IS NO REASON WHY MANY IN THE COMMUNITY SHOULD BE INTIMIDATED BY THE LEADERSHIP THAT EXIST.

TMC staff thanks all who have supported us and quietly supported us. In trying times we look for leadership and find none. There are new fees, fines and taxes. We find gross fiscal mismanagement of funds. We find government enacting new restrictions of what we can and cannot do on our own properties. Restrictions and higher fees for violations on vehicles. All we ask, is that the government balance their check book, we have to. TMC wants the City of Riverside dirt, if you have it, we want it, for example, mismanagement of funds, affairs, illegal property transfers etc. Email us anonymously at thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com with your dirt.

KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND THAT’S ALL WE’RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!

UPDATE: THE DIRT IS ROLLING IN, AND IT’S ALMOST TIME TO PICK-UP THE TRASH! THANKS RIVERSIDE!